PLD 2018 Peshawar 94 | W.P. No. 387-P of 2017 | Decided on 26 October 2017
Before the Peshawar High Court

In this landmark public interest litigation concerning environmental governance and public health, Mr. Saifullah Muhib Kakakhel, Advocate Supreme Court, personally filed and pursued the constitutional petition before the Peshawar High Court. The case highlighted grave environmental and health hazards arising from the improper disposal of medical, clinical, and hospital waste in Peshawar, and ultimately resulted in a reported judgment that significantly strengthened regulatory enforcement across Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, Mr. Kakakhel brought to the Court’s attention serious violations including non-functional incinerators in major hospitals, open dumping and smuggling of hospital waste, emission of highly toxic gases such as dioxins and furans, violation of Environmental Protection Orders (EPOs), and widespread non-compliance with the Hospital Waste Management Rules, 2005. Given the public importance of the matter, the Court sought detailed reports from the Director General Health Services, the Director General Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the management of major public and private hospitals.

Subsequent inspections conducted by the EPA revealed alarming deficiencies. Numerous hospitals were operating without functional incinerators, infectious waste was not properly segregated, hazardous emissions posed carcinogenic environmental risks, untreated waste was being disposed of indiscriminately, and structured waste management plans were largely absent. The Additional Director General Health Services confirmed that standard waste disposal protocols were not being followed by most healthcare facilities.

The principal legal issues before the Court were whether hospitals in Peshawar were complying with the Hospital Waste Management Rules, 2005; whether improper disposal of medical waste violated environmental and public health standards; whether the Provincial Government had failed in its regulatory oversight; and what corrective measures were necessary to safeguard public health.

The High Court held that medical and clinical waste in Peshawar was not being managed according to minimum environmental standards and that urgent corrective measures were imperative. Emphasizing that public health and environmental protection are constitutional imperatives, the Court called for immediate institutional reform.

In a comprehensive and structured order, the Court issued wide-ranging directions. It mandated the Director General Health Services to formulate and deliver official “Health Care Standards” focusing on infection control, hygiene, waste management, and maintenance of a safe healthcare environment for all hospital categories. It ordered organization of waste management workshops within three months and directed joint monitoring by the DG Health and DG EPA, with monthly compliance reports to be submitted to the Human Rights Cell of the High Court.

The Court further required Category A hospitals to install three-chambered incinerators in compliance with Environmental Quality Standards, while Category B and C hospitals were directed to comply within phased timelines. District and tehsil-level incineration facilities were to be established. It ordered that all toxic, infectious, and radioactive waste be treated prior to entry into sewerage systems and directed the Provincial Government to earmark designated landfill sites for disposal of toxic ash. Additionally, the Government was instructed to examine the feasibility of centralized incineration facilities for the Central, South, Hazara, and Malakand regions.

This judgment stands as a landmark public interest decision in environmental law in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It strengthened enforcement of the Hospital Waste Management Rules, 2005, recognized hospital waste as a serious environmental hazard, imposed institutional accountability upon the Health Department and the EPA, established an ongoing judicial monitoring mechanism, and protected citizens from carcinogenic exposure and toxic emissions. Above all, it reaffirmed the vital role of the High Court in advancing environmental governance and safeguarding public health through constitutional oversight.